As for 'why' it's called 'fantasy role playing', well, that's a can of worms that you've unintentionally (I think) set the can opener on. Briefly, it could be fantasy in a "Hey! I can do whatever, limited only by my imagination!" sense, or in an "events taking place in an unreal world" sense. Mechanics, one way or the other, don't determine if it's fantasy or not. Then there's another can called "why people play" sitting right next to that first can, and which I will pretend isn't there...

*noticing that I've kicked a hornets nest* Sorry, folks. Not my intention, just a common case of "my cup of passion runneth over..."

*opens a jar of Keeagan's Ointment & passes around to sooth any stinging egos*

Like many folks I don't have much time to game; so if I sit down to a table as a player, I want maximum entertainment. For me that means access to the mechanics & free reign for my imagination. I don't think I'm alone in this viewpoint, as D&D has been cultivating this mind set ever since 2nd ed. Like it or not, D&D is the standard by which all FRPG's will be compared. I find myself in an odd place concerning the DCC RPG. The system grants this kind of freedom to the DM's, but not to the players... as such I love running the game, but I have no interest in playing the game & I'm doing my best to extend as much access to the system mechanics to the players as I can get away with; but the system doesn't leave much "wiggle room."

Quote:

To address both your point and Jim's point above, the funnel doesn't have to be the only character creation method. You don't have to start at 0-level. That idea is in the game, as is. To support that with just one quote from page 10 of the beta: "The author strongly encourages you to begin play using the method as described here exactly." I sure don't read 'strongly encourages' the same as 'demands'.

I disagree. If the sentence stopped at the word 'described' I would agree with you; but the addition of the word 'exactly' adds extra emphasis, and with the use of itallics the author adds a considerable amount of emotional punch to the sentence.

Quote:

Whether or not you do heed that suggestion, you need never think about the funnel and it's ins and outs again. Carry on with whatever method works for you. If the 'thousand other distractions' that let you decide the details are not enough, and you want one more, then do things that way with DCC, too.

I've already done that. I've got 14+ pages of house rules to cover all the NPC's I'm going to need to tell a passable story in the Aereth setting: gnomes, half-elves, half-orks, rangers & barbarians; and magic item mechanics that aren't going to punish folks for owning them.

I'm not allowing access to 90% of it because we're still in beta-test mode. After the game goes live, any new characters generated by the players will be according to the house rules. That way they'll get a personal feel for the differences without having to restart the game.

Quote:

It ain't gonna break it if you do.

I think the author disagrees with you...'The recipe for DCC RPG: start with "100% as written," add house rules, ...'

This tells me the author doesn't want us taking liberties with his rules as written, but we may add to them if we feel the need. I also interpret this to mean that he wants games to start with the funnel.

I got the impression both from the tone of the rules and the statements Mr G has made here and in person that he reallyreallyreally wanted folks to try the system out Au natral first time no house rules no tinkering nothin'

Which of course makes sense if you have something in Beta test you need an initial reaction to what there is right? Also it serves to remind us quite forcibly that there are alternate ways to doing things to the way D&D is now. Some like that some do not. Either reaction is equally valid. If you play through it and get a strange mixed stat char starting up to Herodom and you enjoy that Great! If you discard it for your players and simply holding it up as a cautionary tale of the bad old days! great also!

I'd be willing to bet a few Gp that when he reads any comment like Tortog's; that you had 14 pages of house rules to make his core game yours already. That he sat down and smiled feeling: Job Well Done

I think we've all been around to know that gamers are very good at having opinions on how things will work in play that are entirely conjectural and not actually based on play test. Many folks have reported the funnel being much more fun than they anticipated.

So, I agree with the decision to strongly urge folks to play the game as written first. Otherwise it runs the risk of being yet another generic D&D clone.

This is why I struggle with the heroism vs. RAW question myself. I used to house rule games heavily. Now I just try to only play games I enjoy. I'll make a situational ruling to keep things headed in fun directions, but that is about it.

I'm looking forward to owning DCC, but whether it can become a group staple remains to be seen.

Oh, i don't get why people don't like the funnel. I often decide to play a totally random PC in other games anyway, like I did just recently for WFRP... I rolled occupation twice and got scribe or app.wizard. My aim for that character is to become a powerful wizard. Therefore as occupation I picked.... scribe ^^I like to push my way through a difficult carreer before actually getting my first cantrips: they seem such a greater reward when i eventually get them.

Oh, i don't get why people don't like the funnel. I often decide to play a totally random PC in other games anyway, like I did just recently for WFRP... I rolled occupation twice and got scribe or app.wizard. My aim for that character is to become a powerful wizard. Therefore as occupation I picked.... scribe ^^I like to push my way through a difficult carreer before actually getting my first cantrips: they seem such a greater reward when i eventually get them.

I think that some folks have a pre-determined idea on what kind of character they want to run, so the randomness of the funnel troubles them. My wife, for example, only wants to run magic-user characters. She wasn't happy with the funnel and with the "3d6 in order" stat rolls because she kept getting characters not suited to the class she wanted to play.

I suspect that's why folks are so strong in their opinions -- either they have a definite concept they want or they are willing to trust randomness, but those philosophies don't really overlap.

"The worthy GM never purposely kills players' PCs, He presents opportunities for the rash and unthinking players to do that all on their own." -- Gary Gygax"Don't ask me what you need to hit. Just roll the die and I will let you know!" -- Dave Arneson

Oh, i don't get why people don't like the funnel. I often decide to play a totally random PC in other games anyway, like I did just recently for WFRP... I rolled occupation twice and got scribe or app.wizard. My aim for that character is to become a powerful wizard. Therefore as occupation I picked.... scribe ^^I like to push my way through a difficult carreer before actually getting my first cantrips: they seem such a greater reward when i eventually get them.

I think that some folks have a pre-determined idea on what kind of character they want to run, so the randomness of the funnel troubles them. My wife, for example, only wants to run magic-user characters. She wasn't happy with the funnel and with the "3d6 in order" stat rolls because she kept getting characters not suited to the class she wanted to play.

I suspect that's why folks are so strong in their opinions -- either they have a definite concept they want or they are willing to trust randomness, but those philosophies don't really overlap.

My players' issues with it weren't so much random stats as an incongruence between random stats and occupation. A 16 STR "Fortune Teller" that the player had envisioned as this wizened old woman is a good example.

The 0-level funnel was and is fun. But, IMO, it's a kind of fun with an expiration date. Fun once. Maybe twice. But after the third funnel I think groups will be looking for more.

Having at least the option to, say, roll up three Occupations per character and choose the one you want is a fair compromise, IMO. It keeps the randomness, requires nothing more than a short blurb in the text and needs no changes to the rules.

I know were entirely off topic but...I haven't had a chance to be on the player side of the table yet, but I'm playing in a labyrinth lord game (just joined it) where we rolled 6 sets of 3d6 stats (essentially 6 full characters), and funneled them ourselves, picking the ones we liked best for the class we wanted. No drop lowest, all stats rolled in order. I got a thief with 14 dex and 18 wis. Quite the interesting thief, but I'm playing what the dice dealt me, and it's pretty damn fun.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum